John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank both groups for their attendance. This is a topic we are taking very seriously and we are trying to deal with it as quickly as we can. I commend CIS on its work. I see at first hand how busy the offices are in Wicklow, the constituency I represent. The delegates alluded to the fact that over 2,300 people will make contact with CIS today and every other day and that over 1,800 people will make direct contact by walking into the offices. The work is essential. I commend everyone involved, particularly all the volunteers. I become concerned when I hear volunteers are walking away from the organisation because of uncertainty with regard to restructuring and regionalisation, including in Dún Laoghaire.

Obviously, as Mr. Lally said, there will be a serious impact. He mentioned that it is critical to empower the citizen. That is one of the primary roles and functions. One must question why the CIB has not engaged in a meaningful consultation process with the witnesses or with the public. Other regulatory bodies undertake consultations which are open to the public to give its response. That critical part of the consultation process is missing and I am concerned about that. Mr. Lally made the point that the process has not been open or transparent, and that is coming across to me and other people. It is alarming. He also states that CIB has not made a compelling case at any time for the need for change. Why is it moving ahead with this? A question was asked about seeing the cost-benefit analysis. It is clear from the previous contributions that have been made to the committee that no cost-benefit analysis has been carried out with regard to these changes.

Perhaps Mr. Rynn or Mr. McGuane will respond to my questions. I spoke about stakeholders and the need for CIB to engage with them. Was any reason provided to the witnesses at any point for their organisations not being seen as key stakeholders in a consultation? As they said, the citizens do not appear to be seen as stakeholders. Do they know who the key stakeholders were in this? The witness said the organisation sought to engage with the CIB. How was that undertaken and what was the reason for it being refused? Mr. McGuane also referred to governance. The previous presentation from the CIB mentioned statutory obligations that the current structure may not reach. I note it was mentioned that the Comptroller and Auditor General has no issues. The CIB spoke about a compliance statement required from the Comptroller and Auditor General and, in respect of governance, it spoke of the principles required, such as clarity of governance, value for money and fairness. Does Mr. McGuane believe the present structure would fail these obligations, given that he stated the Comptroller and Auditor General has no cause for concern?

I have a few other points for Mr. Lally. He referred to franchising. When I hear the word "franchising" it sets off alarm bells because there is the potential for privatisation in the future. Does he believe there is an intention to have a form of privatisation or a contracted system in the future? I have real concerns about that. On some of the other points, I am probably over time-----